I have a logical unit created with sbdadm create-lu that it I replicating
with zfs send / receive between 2 build 134 hosts. The these LUs are
iSCSI targets used as VMFS filesystems and ESX RDMs mounted on a Windows
2003 machine. The zfs pool names are the same on both machines. The
replicat
I have one corrupt file in my rpool, but when I run "zpool status -v", I don't
get a filename, just an address. Any idea how to fix this? Here's the output:
p...@dellt7500:~# zpool status -v rpool
pool: rpool
state: ONLINE
status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data
Ross Walker writes:
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Roch Bourbonnais
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Le 27 mai 2010 à 07:03, Brent Jones a écrit :
> >
> >> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Matt Connolly
> >> wrote:
> >>> I've set up an iScsi volume on OpenSolaris (snv_134) with these commands:
"valrh...@gmail.com" wrote:
> Has anyone looked into the new LTFS on LTO-5 for tape backups? Any idea how
> this would work with ZFS? I'm presuming ZFS send / receive are not going to
> work. But it seems rather appealing to have the metadata properly with the
> data, and being able to browse
On Aug 4, 2010, at 3:52 AM, Roch wrote:
>
> Ross Walker writes:
>
>> On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Roch Bourbonnais
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Le 27 mai 2010 à 07:03, Brent Jones a écrit :
>>>
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Matt Connolly
wrote:
> I've set up an iScsi volume on
Ross Asks:
So on that note, ZFS should disable the disks' write cache,
not enable them despite ZFS's COW properties because it
should be resilient.
No, because ZFS builds resiliency on top of unreliable parts. it's able to deal
with contained failures (lost state) of the disk write
On 04/08/2010, at 2:13, Roch Bourbonnais wrote:
>
> Le 27 mai 2010 à 07:03, Brent Jones a écrit :
>
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Matt Connolly
>> wrote:
>>> I've set up an iScsi volume on OpenSolaris (snv_134) with these commands:
>>>
>>> sh-4.0# zfs create rpool/iscsi
>>> sh-4.0# zfs
Hi,
i am working with ZFS now a days, i am facing some performance issues
from application team, as they said writes are very slow in ZFS w.r.t UFS.
Kindly send me some good reference or books links. i will be very thankful
to you.
BR,
Tayyab
___
zfs
On Aug 4, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Roch wrote:
>
>
> Ross Asks:
> So on that note, ZFS should disable the disks' write cache,
> not enable them despite ZFS's COW properties because it
> should be resilient.
>
> No, because ZFS builds resiliency on top of unreliable parts. it's able to
> deal
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
You're a funny guy. :)
Let me re-phrase it: I'm sure I'm getting degradation in performance as my
applications are waiting more on I/O now than they used to do (based on CPU
utilization graphs I have). The impression part, is that the reason is the
On Aug 4, 2010, at 12:26 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
The tipping point for the change in the first fit/best fit
allocation algorithm is
now 96%. Previously, it was 70%. Since you don't specify which OS,
build,
or zpool version, I'll assume you are on something modern.
I'm running Solaris 10
On Aug 4, 2010, at 12:20 AM, Khyron wrote:
I notice you use the word "volume" which really isn't accurate or
appropriate here.
Yeah, it didn't seem right to me, but I wasn't sure about the
nomenclature, thanks for clarifying.
You may want to get a bit more specific and choose from the old
Ross Walker writes:
> On Aug 4, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Roch wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ross Asks:
> > So on that note, ZFS should disable the disks' write cache,
> > not enable them despite ZFS's COW properties because it
> > should be resilient.
> >
> > No, because ZFS builds resilienc
Are there other file systems underneath daten/backups that have snapshots?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Actually, no. I could care less about incrementals, and multivolume handling.
My purpose is to have occasional, long-term archival backup of big experimental
data sets. The challenge is keeping everything organized, and readable several
years later, where I only need to recall a small subset of
On Aug 4, 2010, at 12:04 PM, Roch wrote:
>
> Ross Walker writes:
>> On Aug 4, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Roch wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ross Asks:
>>> So on that note, ZFS should disable the disks' write cache,
>>> not enable them despite ZFS's COW properties because it
>>> should be resilient.
>>>
>
Maybe it is a temporary file.
You might try running a scrub to see if it goes away.
I would also use fmdump -eV to see if this disk is
having problems.
Thanks,
Cindy
On 08/04/10 01:05, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
I have one corrupt file in my rpool, but when I run "zpool status -v", I don't
g
On Wed, August 4, 2010 12:25, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
> Actually, no. I could care less about incrementals, and multivolume
> handling. My purpose is to have occasional, long-term archival backup of
> big experimental data sets. The challenge is keeping everything organized,
> and readable severa
On Aug 3, 2010, at 11:58 PM, Terry Hull wrote:
> I have a logical unit created with sbdadm create-lu that it I replicating
> with zfs send / receive between 2 build 134 hosts. The these LUs are iSCSI
> targets used as VMFS filesystems and ESX RDMs mounted on a Windows 2003
> machine. The zf
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
Checking with iostat, I noticed the average wait time to be between 40ms and
50ms for all disks. Which doesn't seem too bad.
Actually, this is quite high. I would not expect such long wait times
except for when under extreme load such as a benchma
On Aug 4, 2010, at 3:22 AM, TAYYAB REHMAN wrote:
> Hi,
> i am working with ZFS now a days, i am facing some performance issues
> from application team, as they said writes are very slow in ZFS w.r.t UFS.
> Kindly send me some good reference or books links. i will be very thankful to
> you.
Hi,
We have a server running b134. The server runs xen and uses a vdev as
the storage.
The xen image is running nevada 134.
I took a snapshot last night to move the xen image to another server.
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
vpool/host/snv_130 32.8G
Folks,
In my application, I need to present user-created filesystems. For my test, I
created a zfs pool called mypool and two file systems called cifs1 and cifs2.
However, when I run "zfs list," I see a lot more entries:
# zfs list
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
mypool
On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Assuming that your impressions are correct, are you sure that your
new disk drives are similar to the older ones? Are they an
identical model? Design trade-offs are now often resulting in
larger capacity drives with reduced performance.
Hi Peter,
I don't think we have any property that determines who created
the file system.
Would this work instead:
# zfs list -r mypool
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
mypool 172K 134G33K /mypool
mypool/cifs131K 134G31K /mypool/cifs1
mypool/cifs231K
You can use 'zpool history -l syspool' to show the username of the person
who created the dataset. The history is in a ring buffer, so if too many
pool operations have happened since the dataset was created, the
information is lost.
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Peter Taps wrote:
Folks,
In my app
Oooh... Good call!
I scrubbed the pool twice, then it showed a real filename from an old snapshot
that I had attempted to delete before (like a month ago), and gave an error,
which I subsequently forgot about. I deleted the snapshot and cleaned up a few
other snaphots, cleared the error, rescru
> From: Richard Elling
> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:05:21 -0700
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Logical Units and ZFS send / receive
>
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 11:58 PM, Terry Hull wrote:
>> I have a logical unit created with sbdadm create-lu that it I replicating
>> with zfs send / receive between 2 bu
Because this is a non-redundant root pool, you should still
check fmdump -eV to make sure the corrupted files aren't
due to some ongoing disk problems.
cs
On 08/04/10 13:45, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
Oooh... Good call!
I scrubbed the pool twice, then it showed a real filename from an old snaps
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
I will also start using rsync v3 to reduce the memory foot print, so I might
be able to give back some RAM to ARC, and I'm thinking maybe going to 16GB
RAM, as the pool is quite large and I'm sure more ARC wouldn't hurt.
It is definitely a wise ide
On Aug 4, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2010, at 12:26 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
>
>> The tipping point for the change in the first fit/best fit allocation
>> algorithm is
>> now 96%. Previously, it was 70%. Since you don't specify which OS, build,
>> or zpool version, I'
I have a host running svn_133 with a root mirror pool that I'd like to rebuild
with a fresh install on new hardware; but I still have data on the pool that I
would like to preserve.
Given a rpool with disks c7d0s0 and c6d0s0, I think the following process will
do what I need:
1. Run these comm
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Chris Josephes
>
> I have a host running svn_133 with a root mirror pool that I'd like to
> rebuild with a fresh install on new hardware; but I still have data on
> the pool that I would like t
You can also use the "zpool split" command and save yourself having to do the
zfs send|zfs recv step - all the data will be preserved.
"zpool split rpool preserve" does essentially everything up to and including
the "zpool export preserve" commands you listed in your original email. Just
don'
On Aug 4, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Terry Hull wrote:
>> From: Richard Elling
>> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:05:21 -0700
>> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Logical Units and ZFS send / receive
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2010, at 11:58 PM, Terry Hull wrote:
>>> I have a logical unit created with sbdadm create-lu that it I r
>
>
> So, after rebuilding, you don't want to restore the
> same OS that you're
> currently running. But there are some files you'd
> like to save for after
> you reinstall. Why not just copy them off somewhere,
> in a tarball or
> something like that?
It's about 200+ gigs of files. If I had a
> You can also use the "zpool split" command and save
> yourself having to do the zfs send|zfs recv step -
> all the data will be preserved.
>
> "zpool split rpool preserve" does essentially
> everything up to and including the "zpool export
> preserve" commands you listed in your original email.
> From: Richard Elling
> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 18:40:49 -0700
> To: Terry Hull
> Cc: "zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org"
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Logical Units and ZFS send / receive
>
> On Aug 4, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Terry Hull wrote:
>>> From: Richard Elling
>>> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:05:21
38 matches
Mail list logo
